Free Traffic Legal Advice

What was the date of issue of the claim?

Here is a suggested WS and draft order to go with your N244 application. Double check it and insert any missing dates in the appropriate placeholders:

Quote

IN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]

Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd

Claimant

- and -

[Defendant's Full Name]

Defendant

---

WITNESS STATEMENT

I, [your full name], of [your address] , will say as follows: 

1. I am the Defendant in this matter, and I make this witness statement in support of my application to set aside the County Court Judgment (CCJ) entered against me on 19th May 2023. The judgment was entered in default due to defective service of the claim.

2. I first became aware of the claim against me on 14th October 2024, after a prospective landlord refunded my holding deposit due to a County Court Judgment (CCJ) appearing on my record. This was a tremendous shock, as I had not received any claim form or detailed particulars of the claim in relation to this matter.

3. After making enquiries with the Civil National Business Centre (CNBC), I obtained details of the claimant, their legal representative, and the Particulars of Claim (PoC), which confirmed that the claimant had obtained a default CCJ against me relating to an alleged parking event.

4. Upon further investigation, I established the following:

(i) The claim relates to an alleged parking event on 26th December 2019;

(ii) The claim form was sent to an old address at which I no longer reside; and

(iii) Had I been given the opportunity, I would have successfully defended the claim.

5. I did not receive any pre-claim correspondence, including the letter of claim required under the Pre-Action Protocol (PAP), nor did I receive the claim form or any particulars of claim, depriving me of the ability to defend the claim. The Claimant, knows that people move homes from time to time, also should have known that I had not responded to any communications sent to my old address.

6. This situation is directly addressed in the Civil Procedure Rules, specifically CPR 6.9(3), which states:

'(3) Where a claimant has reason to believe that the address of the defendant is an address at which the defendant no longer resides or carries on business, the claimant must take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of the defendant’s current residence or place of business (“current address”).'

7. The Claimant used an outdated address ([insert address where claim was served at the time]), at which I no longer reside. I believe this is where they served the claim, constituting a clear breach of both the Civil Procedure Rules (CPRs) and their obligations under the Approved Operator Scheme, specifically the IPC Code of Practice. Further details and relevant issues are outlined below.

8. The Claimant was obligated to take reasonable steps to verify my correct address, as required under section 22.1 of the IPC Code of Practice v7 (November 2019) which states:

22.1 Operators must take reasonable steps to ensure that the Motorist’s details are still correct if 12 months have passed from the Parking Event before issuing court proceedings.

9. Given that more than 12 months had passed between the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued in December 2019 and the County Court Judgment (CCJ) obtained in May 2023, this duty was especially pertinent.
 
10. I did not receive any claim form or detailed particulars of the claim related to this matter until I became aware of it, as stated in paragraph 2 above.
 
11. As more than four months have passed since the CCJ was entered, during which I remained unaware of both the claim and the judgment, the claim should now be dismissed under CPR 7.5.

12. Due to the Claimant’s breach of the Civil Procedure Rules—amounting to an abuse of the Court’s process—the claim form was never properly served. Consequently, the judgment must be set aside at the Claimant’s expense, and the claim dismissed, as it is now too late for the particulars of claim to be re-served.

13. Should the claim not be dismissed, despite the substantial case law outlined below supporting dismissal at the set-aside hearing, I request the opportunity to properly defend it. My application relies upon the 'mandatory set aside' rule in CPR 13.2 (and, in the alternative, CPR 13.3)."

14. In light of the procedural failings and the resultant default judgment, I proactively reached out to the Claimant, offering them the opportunity to consent to a joint application to set aside the judgment and dismiss the claim. I proposed that the Claimant cover the court fee, with no order as to costs. This offer was made in a genuine attempt to rectify the situation without unnecessary court proceedings and to correct the procedural wrongs that had been caused.

15. To facilitate this, I offered to defer filing a unilateral set-aside application, allowing the Claimant reasonable time to consider the proposal and prepare the necessary documents for a joint submission to the Court. I clearly communicated that if no response was received, I would proceed with a unilateral application to set aside the judgment, strike out the particulars of claim, dismiss the claim, and seek full indemnity costs against the Claimant. Despite my reasonable approach, the Claimant refused this offer, leaving me no choice but to proceed with this application.

16. I have set out the grounds for my application in the attached draft order.

THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE THE CLAIM 

17. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on 19th May 2023. I am aware that the Claimant is Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd and that the assumed claim is in respect of an unpaid Parking Charge Notice.
 
18. CPR 6.9 stipulates that an "Individual" should be served at their "Usual or last known residence."  As I have not had any correspondence in relation to this matter, other than the brief case details emailed to me on 21st October 2024 from the courts, it is clear that the Claimant, having obtained a previous address from the DVLA and having received no response, did not perform the requisite "reasonable diligence" required to find my correct address to serve the claim form in.

19. Had reasonable diligence been taken, my personal details are found in multiple public sources, including credit reference agencies and the Electoral Roll. The claimant did not have any contact with the defendant for over 12 months since the PCN was issued and thus should have considered they had incorrect details for service.
 
20. This is a breach of CPR 13.2(a), as the claim form was never served to my current address. Consequently, I was unaware of the Default Judgment until I discovered it, as stated in paragraph 2, on [date you found out about the CCJ]. The judgment was therefore wrongly entered, as I was unable to submit an acknowledgement of service without notification of the case (CPR 13.3).

PRELIMINARY MATTER: Striking Out the Claim Due to Insufficient Particulars of Claim

21. Should the Court set aside the default judgment, I submit that the claim should be struck out as a preliminary matter due to the inadequacy of the Particulars of Claim (PoC), which fail to meet the requirements of CPR 16.4(1)(a). The PoC do not state a concise cause of action, rendering them deficient and non-compliant with the Civil Procedure Rules.

22. The Court is encouraged to consider persuasive appellate case law, particularly Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) v Chan (2023) and CPMS v Akande (2024), where claims with similarly vague and unparticularised PoC were struck out. Both cases support the principle that a claim must state clear grounds to allow a defendant a fair opportunity to understand and respond to the allegations.

23. In the current case, the Claimant’s PoC lack essential details and do not provide a coherent statement of facts, as required under CPR 16.4. Consequently, these deficiencies prevent me from fully understanding the basis of the claim or preparing an informed defence.

24. I respectfully request that the Court consider striking out the claim entirely on these grounds if the CCJ is set aside. This would prevent further proceedings on a fundamentally flawed claim and avoid unnecessary costs and time for both parties.

THE CLAIM HAS EXPIRED UNSERVED

25. I challenge the jurisdiction of the Court to hear this claim now, as it would effectively require dispensing with service. There are no exceptional circumstances to justify the limited discretion of the Court to validate defective service retrospectively by reviving an expired, unserved, and meritless claim.

26. Service of the claim form to an outdated address constitutes defective service, resulting in the claim expiring unserved. The Claimant currently has no claim, as it was not properly served within the required four-month period, and it is now time-barred.

27. Continuing an expired, unserved claim more than four months after it was issued (but never properly served) is impossible under CPR 7.5, which prohibits such action.

28. The Claimant is entirely responsible for failing to serve the claim correctly within the four-month deadline, as stipulated by CPR 7.5, and, as a result, the claim has now expired unserved.

29. The Claimant should not be afforded further opportunities to waste the Court’s time after failing to follow pre-action protocols for debt claims, breaching the IPC Code of Practice, and failing to take “reasonable steps” (CPR 6.9) to verify my current address.

30. If the Claimant believes it still has a claim, the only appropriate course of action would be to file afresh and issue a ‘Letter Before Claim’ to my correct address, this time in compliance with the pre-action protocol for debt claims. I have received no claim form or detailed particulars of the claim at my current address, leaving me unable to build a defence.

31. Accordingly, this claim should be struck out as more than four months have passed since the issue of proceedings and the claim was defectively served (i.e., it was never served).
 
SET ASIDE APPLICATION WAS MADE PROMPTLY

32. I have responded to this matter promptly. I discovered a CCJ had been obtained against me on 14th October 2024, after a prospective landlord refunded my holding deposit. I promptly contacted the Civil National Business Centre on 24th October 2024 to obtain relevant information about this default judgment. 

33. On the 21st October 2024 I wrote to the Claimants legal representative offering to jointly apply to set aside the judgment. Despite allowing them a reasonable amount of time to seek instructions from the claimant, no response was received so on the [insert todays date], I have submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgement and fairly present my case 

34. Considering all of the above, I was unable to defend myself against this claim. I believe that the claim against me is without merit and the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly. Thus, I respectfully request that the judgment be set aside, the claim struck out, and that the Court consider ordering the Claimant to reimburse my application fee of £303 if this request is successful.
 
Statement of truth:
 
I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. 

Signed: 


Date:

Here is the draft order that should accompany the WS:

Quote

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd


Claimant

- and -

[Defendant's Full Name]

Defendant

---

DRAFT ORDER

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

UPON considering the application of the Defendant to set aside the Judgment by default entered on [date];

AND UPON reading the evidence in support of the application;

AND UPON the court taking note that the Claimant was not entitled to default judgment, having failed to serve on the Defendant's usual residential address;

AND UPON more than 4 months having passed (CPR 7.5 refers) since the issue of proceedings on [date of issue];

AND UPON the court finding that the Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) by lacking a concise statement of facts and therefore do not constitute a valid cause of action;

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The Judgment by default entered against the Defendant on 19th May 2023 is hereby set aside.

2. The claim be struck out as more than 4 months has passed since the issue of proceedings on [date of issue] without proper service on the Defendant.

3. The claim is further struck out on the grounds that the Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) and do not provide a concise statement of facts necessary to establish a cause of action.

4. The Claimant shall pay the Defendant’s costs of this application in the sum of £303.

Date: [date]

You will need to attach any evidence and the following two transcripts. Each item of evidence must be numbered and noted within the WS where it is referenced. Use your initials and a number as in "AB-01", AB-02" etc. Number them in the same sequence that they appear in the WS so there is a logical flow.

CEL v Chan Transcript

CPMS v Akande Transcript

Here is a suggested WS and draft order to go with your N244 application. Double check it and insert any missing dates in the appropriate placeholders:

Quote

IN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]

Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd

Claimant

- and -

[Defendant's Full Name]

Defendant

---

WITNESS STATEMENT

I, [your full name], of [your address] , will say as follows: 

1. I am the Defendant in this matter, and I make this witness statement in support of my application to set aside the County Court Judgment (CCJ) entered against me on 19th May 2023. The judgment was entered in default due to defective service of the claim.

2. I first became aware of the claim against me on 14th October 2024, after a prospective landlord refunded my holding deposit due to a County Court Judgment (CCJ) appearing on my record. This was a tremendous shock, as I had not received any claim form or detailed particulars of the claim in relation to this matter.

3. After making enquiries with the Civil National Business Centre (CNBC), I obtained details of the claimant, their legal representative, and the Particulars of Claim (PoC), which confirmed that the claimant had obtained a default CCJ against me relating to an alleged parking event.

4. Upon further investigation, I established the following:

(i) The claim relates to an alleged parking event on 26th December 2019;

(ii) The claim form was sent to an old address at which I no longer reside; and

(iii) Had I been given the opportunity, I would have successfully defended the claim.

5. I did not receive any pre-claim correspondence, including the letter of claim required under the Pre-Action Protocol (PAP), nor did I receive the claim form or any particulars of claim, depriving me of the ability to defend the claim. The Claimant, knows that people move homes from time to time, also should have known that I had not responded to any communications sent to my old address.

6. This situation is directly addressed in the Civil Procedure Rules, specifically CPR 6.9(3), which states:

'(3) Where a claimant has reason to believe that the address of the defendant is an address at which the defendant no longer resides or carries on business, the claimant must take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of the defendant’s current residence or place of business (“current address”).'

7. The Claimant used an outdated address ([insert address where claim was served at the time]), at which I no longer reside. I believe this is where they served the claim, constituting a clear breach of both the Civil Procedure Rules (CPRs) and their obligations under the Approved Operator Scheme, specifically the IPC Code of Practice. Further details and relevant issues are outlined below.

8. The Claimant was obligated to take reasonable steps to verify my correct address, as required under section 22.1 of the IPC Code of Practice v7 (November 2019) which states:

22.1 Operators must take reasonable steps to ensure that the Motorist’s details are still correct if 12 months have passed from the Parking Event before issuing court proceedings.

9. Given that more than 12 months had passed between the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued in December 2019 and the County Court Judgment (CCJ) obtained in May 2023, this duty was especially pertinent.
 
10. I did not receive any claim form or detailed particulars of the claim related to this matter until I became aware of it, as stated in paragraph 2 above.
 
11. As more than four months have passed since the CCJ was entered, during which I remained unaware of both the claim and the judgment, the claim should now be dismissed under CPR 7.5.

12. Due to the Claimant’s breach of the Civil Procedure Rules—amounting to an abuse of the Court’s process—the claim form was never properly served. Consequently, the judgment must be set aside at the Claimant’s expense, and the claim dismissed, as it is now too late for the particulars of claim to be re-served.

13. Should the claim not be dismissed, despite the substantial case law outlined below supporting dismissal at the set-aside hearing, I request the opportunity to properly defend it. My application relies upon the 'mandatory set aside' rule in CPR 13.2 (and, in the alternative, CPR 13.3)."

14. In light of the procedural failings and the resultant default judgment, I proactively reached out to the Claimant, offering them the opportunity to consent to a joint application to set aside the judgment and dismiss the claim. I proposed that the Claimant cover the court fee, with no order as to costs. This offer was made in a genuine attempt to rectify the situation without unnecessary court proceedings and to correct the procedural wrongs that had been caused.

15. To facilitate this, I offered to defer filing a unilateral set-aside application, allowing the Claimant reasonable time to consider the proposal and prepare the necessary documents for a joint submission to the Court. I clearly communicated that if no response was received, I would proceed with a unilateral application to set aside the judgment, strike out the particulars of claim, dismiss the claim, and seek full indemnity costs against the Claimant. Despite my reasonable approach, the Claimant refused this offer, leaving me no choice but to proceed with this application.

16. I have set out the grounds for my application in the attached draft order.

THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE THE CLAIM 

17. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on 19th May 2023. I am aware that the Claimant is Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd and that the assumed claim is in respect of an unpaid Parking Charge Notice.
 
18. CPR 6.9 stipulates that an "Individual" should be served at their "Usual or last known residence."  As I have not had any correspondence in relation to this matter, other than the brief case details emailed to me on 21st October 2024 from the courts, it is clear that the Claimant, having obtained a previous address from the DVLA and having received no response, did not perform the requisite "reasonable diligence" required to find my correct address to serve the claim form in.

19. Had reasonable diligence been taken, my personal details are found in multiple public sources, including credit reference agencies and the Electoral Roll. The claimant did not have any contact with the defendant for over 12 months since the PCN was issued and thus should have considered they had incorrect details for service.
 
20. This is a breach of CPR 13.2(a), as the claim form was never served to my current address. Consequently, I was unaware of the Default Judgment until I discovered it, as stated in paragraph 2, on 14th October 2024. The judgment was therefore wrongly entered, as I was unable to submit an acknowledgement of service without notification of the case (CPR 13.3).

PRELIMINARY MATTER: Striking Out the Claim Due to Insufficient Particulars of Claim

21. Should the Court set aside the default judgment, I submit that the claim should be struck out as a preliminary matter due to the inadequacy of the Particulars of Claim (PoC), which fail to meet the requirements of CPR 16.4(1)(a). The PoC do not state a concise cause of action, rendering them deficient and non-compliant with the Civil Procedure Rules.

22. The Court is encouraged to consider persuasive appellate case law, particularly Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) v Chan (2023) and CPMS v Akande (2024), where claims with similarly vague and unparticularised PoC were struck out. Both cases support the principle that a claim must state clear grounds to allow a defendant a fair opportunity to understand and respond to the allegations.

23. In the current case, the Claimant’s PoC lack essential details and do not provide a coherent statement of facts, as required under CPR 16.4. Consequently, these deficiencies prevent me from fully understanding the basis of the claim or preparing an informed defence.

24. I respectfully request that the Court consider striking out the claim entirely on these grounds if the CCJ is set aside. This would prevent further proceedings on a fundamentally flawed claim and avoid unnecessary costs and time for both parties.

THE CLAIM HAS EXPIRED UNSERVED

25. I challenge the jurisdiction of the Court to hear this claim now, as it would effectively require dispensing with service. There are no exceptional circumstances to justify the limited discretion of the Court to validate defective service retrospectively by reviving an expired, unserved, and meritless claim.

26. Service of the claim form to an outdated address constitutes defective service, resulting in the claim expiring unserved. The Claimant currently has no claim, as it was not properly served within the required four-month period, and it is now time-barred.

27. Continuing an expired, unserved claim more than four months after it was issued (but never properly served) is impossible under CPR 7.5, which prohibits such action.

28. The Claimant is entirely responsible for failing to serve the claim correctly within the four-month deadline, as stipulated by CPR 7.5, and, as a result, the claim has now expired unserved.

29. The Claimant should not be afforded further opportunities to waste the Court’s time after failing to follow pre-action protocols for debt claims, breaching the IPC Code of Practice, and failing to take “reasonable steps” (CPR 6.9) to verify my current address.

30. If the Claimant believes it still has a claim, the only appropriate course of action would be to file afresh and issue a ‘Letter Before Claim’ to my correct address, this time in compliance with the pre-action protocol for debt claims. I have received no claim form or detailed particulars of the claim at my current address, leaving me unable to build a defence.

31. Accordingly, this claim should be struck out as more than four months have passed since the issue of proceedings and the claim was defectively served (i.e., it was never served).
 
SET ASIDE APPLICATION WAS MADE PROMPTLY

32. I have responded to this matter promptly. I discovered a CCJ had been obtained against me on 14th October 2024, after a prospective landlord refunded my holding deposit. I promptly contacted the Civil National Business Centre on 24th October 2024 to obtain relevant information about this default judgment. 

33. On the 21st October 2024 I wrote to the Claimants legal representative offering to jointly apply to set aside the judgment. Despite allowing them a reasonable amount of time to seek instructions from the claimant, no response was received so on the [insert todays date], I have submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgement and fairly present my case 

34. Considering all of the above, I was unable to defend myself against this claim. I believe that the claim against me is without merit and the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly. Thus, I respectfully request that the judgment be set aside, the claim struck out, and that the Court consider ordering the Claimant to reimburse my application fee of £303 if this request is successful.
 
Statement of truth:
 
I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. 

Signed: 


Date:

Here is the draft order that should accompany the WS:

Quote

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd


Claimant

- and -

[Defendant's Full Name]

Defendant

---

DRAFT ORDER

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

UPON considering the application of the Defendant to set aside the Judgment by default entered on 19th May 2023;

AND UPON reading the evidence in support of the application;

AND UPON the court taking note that the Claimant was not entitled to default judgment, having failed to serve on the Defendant's usual residential address;

AND UPON more than 4 months having passed (CPR 7.5 refers) since the issue of proceedings on [date of issue];

AND UPON the court finding that the Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) by lacking a concise statement of facts and therefore do not constitute a valid cause of action;

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The Judgment by default entered against the Defendant on 19th May 2023 is hereby set aside.

2. The claim be struck out as more than 4 months has passed since the issue of proceedings on [date of issue] without proper service on the Defendant.

3. The claim is further struck out on the grounds that the Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) and do not provide a concise statement of facts necessary to establish a cause of action.

4. The Claimant shall pay the Defendant’s costs of this application in the sum of £303.

Date: [date]

You will need to attach any evidence and the following two transcripts. Each item of evidence must be numbered and noted within the WS where it is referenced. Use your initials and a number as in "AB-01", AB-02" etc. Number them in the same sequence that they appear in the WS so there is a logical flow.

CEL v Chan Transcript

CPMS v Akande Transcript

Is the name on the claim form very different from your actual name? Does the name on the claim form match the name on your V5C?

If your surname is misspelled on the N1SDT claim form, according to the Civil Procedure Rules, when completing the Acknowledgment of Service (AoS), you should have provided your full correct name. If the claim form contains an error in your name, you should have indicated this in the AoS. Specifically, Rule 10.5(1)(d) states:

"An acknowledgment of service must... set out the defendant’s name in full. Where the defendant’s name has been incorrectly set out in the claim form, it must be set out correctly in the acknowledgment of service."

So, you should have corrected the spelling of your surname when submitting the AoS. If you didn't, you must inform the court of the correct spelling as soon as possible. You can do this by sending a letter to the CNBC, referencing your claim number, and clearly stating the correct spelling of your name.

At what point in these proceedings did you discover that they had misspelt your name? According to your story, you never received a claim form. So, how do you know that the claim form had your name spelt incorrectly?